Defendant appealed the decision of the Appeals Panel sustaining the violation of R.I.G.L. § 31-27-2.1 (refusal to submit to a chemical test). The Court held that the officer had reasonable grounds to believe that the defendant had operated a vehicle under the influence and request that he submit to a chemical test because the defendant had committed motor vehicle violations, emitted an odor of alcohol, had slurred speech, glossy eyes, and admitted that he had consumed alcohol earlier in the evening. Accordingly, the Court found that the factual findings of the trial magistrate were not clearly erroneous and the magistrate did not abuse his discretion in finding a violation of refusal to submit to a chemical test. Thus, the Court sustained the violation against the defendant.